J. Clarke wrote:
> tim..... wrote:
>> "J. Clarke" wrote in message
>> news:g8f8op01s9a@news2.newsguy.com...
>>> Tom P wrote:
>>>> JamesStep wrote:
>>>>> One factor that's often not considered is that around 25% of
>>>>> people
>>>>> consider themselves nervous flyers, according to some surveys.
>>>>> Many
>>>>> of these people would probably prefer train travel if it was
>>>>> comparable to airlines in cost and time.
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>>>
>>>> I commute regularly 250 miles inside Germany, sometimes by plane,
>>>> sometimes by rail. It is comparable in terms of cost and time -
>>>> but
>>>> as
>>>> time goes by I am getting more nervous travelling by high speed
>>>> train
>>>> than by air. Trains are intrinsically less safe than airplanes for
>>>> many reasons-
>>>> - an airplane has two engines. If one stops, it carries on
>>>> flying.
>>>> A train has dozens of wheels and axles. If just one of these
>>>> breaks
>>>> at high speed, you're dead.
>>> So how many people have died as a result of a single wheel or axle
>>> on
>>> a train breaking?
>> 101
>>
>> Try a search for "Eschede".
>
> OK, one such failure in, well, forever. Yeah, that's real dangerous.
>
>
On a fleet of something less than 100 trains of this model. Scale it up
to the 1000's of commercial airliners and try again.
And we are not talking about one such failure. Just a few months ago
another axle broke on the same kind of train causing a derailment,
fortunately at low speed. Something to think about when you're going
300kmh. Let's see, 16 cars each with 4 axles, and two wheels per axle
makes 128 wheels, and anyone could just break..
Like I said, I feel a lot safer flying. |